Originally Posted by
ChuckyTheGoat
I understand the precedent the judge used. Surely the INTENT of the law was to protect the casino against players who acted irresponsibly and later regretted their losses. Of course, a casino should not be on the hook for the poor decisions of the player.
The key word I'd emphasize is GAMBLING loss. Gambling loss implies some combination of skill and luck that leads to an fortuitous outcome. Use of an electronic aid violates the spirit of the game. It's no longer a fortuitous game that's played on equal footing.
This guy (Postle) absolutely should be on the hook to pay back his VICTIMS. I mentioned how I thought the $10M value was shooting for the moon. The $10M implies some combination of Actual Damages and Punitive Damages.
Postle accumulated an estimated gain of $250,000, by some accounts. I saw a Joe Ingram post that more accurately calculated this figure at $325,000. My opinion is that the VICTIMS should seek out the ACTUAL DAMAGES of $325,000.
It's very hard to calculate a punitive damage amount related to "pain and suffering." Seek out a recoup of the $325,000. Estimate the Other Player time at the table.
That may well be $325k over 30 victims. $11,000 per head would bring the average player back to pre-loss state. This guy absolutely should be held accountable.